Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Shaele" data-source="post: 204384" data-attributes="member: 3071">--Mistwell--The &quot;more reasonable compromise&quot; you mention was exactly the content I had linked to (you just didn't bother to look at it). I never said the link contained the entire book!----The link was removed by the admins before I saw this post, so I had no way of reading it. I did jump to the conclusion - based on other comments and that you were asked to remove it - that it was the &quot;complete sorcerer&quot;. If all you did is post the OGL portions, as someone else did, then I apologize&nbsp; (although I do have to wonder why your link was banned and his post stayed?)--Mistwell--I am a writer trying to make money selling my work, and it would be fair to post SOME of my writing, for non-commercial discussion purposes. ----I agree with this in principle, and I also think it might help sales. However I don't think that you should presume to post Monte's work on his behalf. If Monte agrees with your assessment, maybe _he_ will choose to post his work. I know that if I was trying to make a living from my writing, I would be pretty annoyed to find people scanning it and reposting it on the web without asking first. --Mistwell--Other people here deleted it NOT because it was morally wrong, but because they felt it violated US Copyright laws. ----Fair enough... then let me clearly state that I find it morally objectionable for anyone to post someone else's work without gaining permission. Bringing up copyright law is a great vehicle for removing the link, but I think at least part of the issue is ethical.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Shaele, post: 204384, member: 3071"] --Mistwell-- The "more reasonable compromise" you mention was exactly the content I had linked to (you just didn't bother to look at it). I never said the link contained the entire book! ---- The link was removed by the admins before I saw this post, so I had no way of reading it. I did jump to the conclusion - based on other comments and that you were asked to remove it - that it was the "complete sorcerer". If all you did is post the OGL portions, as someone else did, then I apologize (although I do have to wonder why your link was banned and his post stayed?) --Mistwell-- I am a writer trying to make money selling my work, and it would be fair to post SOME of my writing, for non-commercial discussion purposes. ---- I agree with this in principle, and I also think it might help sales. However I don't think that you should presume to post Monte's work on his behalf. If Monte agrees with your assessment, maybe _he_ will choose to post his work. I know that if I was trying to make a living from my writing, I would be pretty annoyed to find people scanning it and reposting it on the web without asking first. --Mistwell-- Other people here deleted it NOT because it was morally wrong, but because they felt it violated US Copyright laws. ---- Fair enough... then let me clearly state that I find it morally objectionable for anyone to post someone else's work without gaining permission. Bringing up copyright law is a great vehicle for removing the link, but I think at least part of the issue is ethical. [/QUOTE]

Verification